Positive Ratings for the G.O.P., if Not Its Policy (Bush approval: 65%, Gore: 19%)

Three weeks after Republicans captured control of the government, Americans hold favorable views of the party and President Bush, but they are less enthusiastic about some of the policies Republicans are promoting, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.

They are ambivalent about tax cuts, concerned about Republican plans for Social Security and strongly opposed to the administration's environmental policies.

At the same time, nearly half of the respondents expressed an unfavorable opinion of the Democratic Party — the highest percentage with such a view since 1996. Americans said Democrats had failed to offer a plan for the future or a reason to vote against Republicans in this latest campaign, suggesting that the election's outcome was as much a testament to what Democrats did wrong as to what Republicans did right.

In a measure of additional concern for Democrats, Al Gore, who is the best-known Democrat who might run for president in 2004, is viewed unfavorably today by a ratio of almost two to one, despite a weeklong bath of favorable publicity that accompanied his national tour promoting two new books about the American family.

Nearly two-thirds of all respondents, including just over 50 percent of Democrats, said that Mr. Gore should step aside and allow someone else to run against Mr. Bush.

The poll's finding strongly suggests that Mr. Bush's popularity — he has a 65 percent job approval rating — and heavy schedule of campaign appearances contributed to the strong Republican showing on Election Day. Among those who voted Republican, 55 percent described their vote as being cast in support of Mr. Bush; 37 percent of those who voted Democratic described their vote as being against the president.

The Times/CBS News poll was intended to assess the dynamics of the midterm Congressional elections and to compensate for the loss of data caused by the breakdown of the polling system run by the Voter News Service. This poll is not a substitute for that kind of systematic canvassing of voters as they leave voting booths. Nonetheless it offers a picture of public sentiment in the aftermath of an election that rocked the Democrats and put the Republicans in charge of Congress, while leading to assertions by some senior Republicans that the nation was undergoing a political alignment toward their party.

The findings suggest limits to the mandate that some Republicans have claimed for Mr. Bush as a result of the Republican sweep of the November elections. The poll found that the once solidly Democratic South had a higher opinion of the Republican Party than the rest of the nation, reflecting a geographical alignment that both parties have noted over the last 20 years. But it stopped short of suggesting that an ideological transformation was at hand, given respondents' views on what have emerged as touchstone Republican issues this year.

Those polled did not appear to be particularly happy about how the election turned out: just 37 percent described themselves as pleased, compared with 26 percent who said they were disappointed. By contrast, in 1994, the last time Republicans took control of Congress, providing a Republican counterpart to President Bill Clinton's White House, nearly 50 percent of those surveyed described themselves as pleased with the outcome.

As such, the findings appear to be something of a cautionary note to Republicans, particularly at a time when some party members have warned Republican Congressional leaders against moving too aggressively in pushing the party agenda.

The nationwide telephone poll of 996 adults was taken from Wednesday through Sunday. It has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

Mr. Bush remains extremely popular. Still, on a number of issues, there was evidence of public ambivalence or, in some cases, opposition to policies that the White House has signaled it will pursue once Republicans assume control in January.

For example, 55 percent of respondents said they disapproved of the White House effort to drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, compared with 39 percent who approved. Nearly two-thirds said the federal government should do more to regulate the environmental and safety practices of business.

By a ratio of two to one, Americans said they thought that protecting the environment was more important than producing energy. By a seven-to-one ratio, respondents said that Mr. Bush believed that producing energy was more important than protecting the environment.

"I don't like what he's doing to the environment, really," said James Stranz, 57, a Republican unemployed laborer from Philadelphia. "I don't think we should be ruining the environment just because big business wants more oil."

Mr. Stranz added, "I support Bush because Bush didn't back down with Afghanistan."

Mr. Bush's enthusiasm for his $1.25 trillion tax cut plan is also not entirely shared by the public. Two-thirds said they would have preferred the federal surplus be used to shore up Social Security and Medicare rather than finance a tax cut. With the surplus gone, 48 percent of those polled said they did not believe it was possible to both cut taxes and reduce the federal budget deficit; 42 percent said they believed it was possible. But the respondents were evenly divided about whether they preferred to focus on reducing the deficit or cutting taxes.

Nearly 60 percent said they believed that Mr. Bush's tax cut benefited the wealthy; just over 25 percent said it benefited the middle class. Four percent said the tax cut primarily benefited the poor. Three-quarters of respondents said that the first round of tax cuts had not made a noticeable difference in their paychecks.

Americans are also evenly divided about whether future retirees should be permitted to invest part of their Social Security taxes in private accounts, as is strongly supported by Mr. Bush and many Congressional Republicans. At the same time, more than half of the respondents said they did not expect the Social Security system to be able to pay them benefits owed by the time they retire.

Despite Mr. Bush's strong standing with the American public, there were glimmers of hope for the Democrats as they begin preparing a case against Mr. Bush for the 2004 presidential race. Respondents were evenly divided when asked if they had confidence about his ability to make the right decisions about the nation's finances.

Just over half said they were confident in Mr. Bush's ability to handle an international crisis, a relatively small increase, considering what the last two years have been like; 45 percent said the same thing when Mr. Bush took office in 2001.

The findings about Mr. Gore would seem unwelcome news to the former vice president and his advisers as he begins what he describes as a final round of deliberations about another run for the presidency. If he chooses to run, he faces what he described in an interview last week as a virtually start-from-scratch round of fund-raising calls, which could be complicated by a perception that he is a weakened candidate.

The poll was taken just as Mr. Gore was riding a wave of nationwide publicity as part of his book promotion tour. Even Mr. Gore's potential rivals predicted that the exposure would improve his standing among the American people.

So far, that appears not to be the case. Just 19 percent said they held a favorable view of the former vice president, compared with 43 percent who had an unfavorable view. The unfavorable rating is among his worst since The New York Times/CBS News Poll began asking the question about him in 1987. Men are more likely than woman to dislike Mr. Gore.

The unfavorable perception of Mr. Gore crossed party lines: about one-third of Democrats viewed him favorably, compared with about one-fifth who viewed him unfavorably. Of potentially more concern to Mr. Gore, just 17 percent of independent voters said they had a favorable opinion of him, compared with 36 percent who described their view as unfavorable.

"I know that Gore is going around now in all these public places and trying to establish an agenda, but I don't believe he can," said Phyllis Snyder, 68, a Democrat from Summit, Ark. "I just don't believe he can win. I think people are tired of Al Gore. I don't they want Al Gore. "

In another follow-up interview, Wayne Denson, 75, a Democrat and retired optician from Kansas City, Mo., said: "I voted for him to start with but now that Bush got elected, I'd rather vote for Bush than Gore. Bush has got more intelligence."

A spokesman for Mr. Gore, Jano Cabrera, said he was not concerned about the findings, saying it was still early in the race. "With two years to go, realistically speaking, none of these measurements mean much," Mr. Cabrera said. "More importantly, Gore realizes that if he runs he will be starting from scratch and will have to earn every vote."

We can have nuclear energy and both improve the environment and reduce energy costs, but that requires opening people's closed minds on the subject.

And this is what I think we ought to take away from this poll. We need to educate the people on what we want to do, what the pros and cons are. That is always a good idea and very necessary after 8 years of utter crap claiming to represent our view.

Another BS poll from a BS paper.

Apparently the socialist propaganda message for the month is "tax cuts benefit the rich", repeat 10,000 times until all of the simple minded get it.

The response is not to fire contrary statsistics back (too easy for the rat to deny) but to state out loud that the person uttering this nonsense is merely repeating socialist class warfare propaganda, orchestrated by Nancy Pelosi and her socialist minions.

That works a lot better and they shut up quick.

Then you have to ask them point blank if they were told what to say by the DNC and dare them to lie about it.

Obviously the NYT was.

Two-thirds said they would have preferred the federal surplus be used to shore up Social Security and Medicare rather than finance a tax cut.

How much of a degenerate bastard do you have to be to formulate a totally biased question like this and then report on it as if it was true.

The NYT and CBS are irrelevant.

Fox News and the Washington Times ought to start a polling operation.

Apparently the socialist propaganda message for the month is "tax cuts benefit the rich", repeat 10,000 times until all of the simple minded get it.

There was a guy who called RUSH today who lived in Russia (Soviet Union) for 40 years. He's been in the US for 10 years now.
He said the Democrats do the same thing the old socialists in Russia did. They dumb down the people in schools because they're easier to lead with propaganda . They condemn and demonize the rich, so people kill or ruin them, and they can then share their wealth and drink with it.
He was right on the money with what he was saying. RUSH gave him free access to his website, free RUSH newspaper, and he gets to choose free RUSH stuff from his website.
The Russian guy explained the democrat party better than anyone I've ever heard. He explained how it was done in the USSR and how the democrats copy it here in the US.

Three-quarters of respondents said that the first round of tax cuts had not made a noticeable difference in their paychecks.

Probably because most of them don't pay a lot of Federal taxes to begin with. We don't. And besides, why would the taxcuts affect the amount in a paycheck, unless the withholdings had changed? It's the total numbers that count.

This is the freebie polling done for Gore to follow up phase one of his latest comeback attempt.

Bet they are somber in the Gore/NYT/CBS offices...hehehe..

Must be pure hell to be such talented cheaters and still have it not be enough! ;-)

What I find fascinating is Gore's poll numbers match almost to a T his rock bottom book sales over at Amazon.com. Hey Mullah Raines' operatives did not have to blow a wad of money to find out that Algore's popularity is in the dumps. Sure the New York Times trotted out the old blame the rich and they're raping the environment Democrat canards but fewer and fewer people each year buy this stuff cause its clear to the American people the Democrats really have nothing to say to the country. All in all, no matter how much the NYT tries to spin this, the truth is the poll is not good news for the Dems chances in 2004. And since its a "push poll" most people who don't read Mullah Raines' rag know right away from the slanted questions asked that it doesn't even take a real measure of how Americans think. That's good cause the liberals really have no clue whatsoever as to what most of us really think and besides we're all mind-numbed Bushbots anyway.

The last time I heard or read the term "Mr. Bush" used so many times it was in the days of George Senior. That's one of the subtle ways the leftist media lets us know he isn't their president. They squawk redundantly "Mr. Bush, Mr. Bush, Mr. Bush" without changing noun or pronoun.

When Billy Jeff was in office it was something else altogether. He was referred to as "the president" often seemingly 50 times per story by the likes of Nina Totenbag and such. Think they aren't a herd of Bolshies in the media? Even on something as small as this they speak and write with incredible unanimity.

heh... they can't live down their loathing of President Bush. What really trips up the Gray Lady in this poll is the finding that nearly HALF of Americans have an UNFAVORABLE view of the Democratic Party! Now where they get that impression from? Could it be the Wellstone rally made a difference? Any way you add up the true numbers, it should lay to rest the liberal delusion this is a 50-50 nation. Not even close. Ann Coulter's going to have a field day with this news in her next column.

...according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll...

Nearly two-thirds of all respondents, including just over 50 percent of Democrats, said that Mr. Gore should step aside and allow someone else to run against Mr. Bush....

Positive Ratings for the G.O.P., if Not Its Policy (Bush approval: 65%, Gore: 19%) The New York Times | 11/26/2002 | ADAM NAGOURNEY and JANET ELDER

The much-hyped "college tour" showdown at Albany Downtown was promoted for weeks by Matthews and MSNBC as "a one-on-one with the senator from New York." The show -- and the "senator" -- were not as advertised, however.

Unfortunately for America, the only visible adversary at the SUNY access-journalism extravaganza was a free press. MSNBC trumpeted clinton as Zogby-polled presidential timber: "Always finishes a strong second to Gore," they puffed. (A patent presidential disqualifier if ever there was one, if you ask me.)

Notwithstanding this obvious lapse in logic, one wonders where and when Zogby collected his data, According to the most recent relevant poll, which was conducted by the Marist Institute last month -- and according to the results of this month's election, nary a soul wants hillary clinton back in the West Wing.

Hardball's Softball hillary clinton 'Interview' Elevates Access Journalism to Historic New Heights | 11/25/2002 | MIA T

Excellent post.

That ex-Russian that called Rush yesterday also told how he was able to work hard with his wife and buy a house within 1 1/2 years of arriving in the US with an income that about that of what it costs taxpayers to support a family on welfare.

He said his daughters were getting A+s in English within 6 months of starting public school here.

That is the family we can depend on when the chips are down.

They really love America but also have the steel of WWII Stalingrad civilian heroes in their spines.

Great new American Patriots.

God bless them every one!

I found this result rather curious. Perhaps some GOPers are not pleased with SD, NJ and the CA gov's race? And over one third presumably felt ambivalent about the election results.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.